Intergroup preference, not dehumanization, explains social biases in emotion attribution

Psychological models can only help improve intergroup relations if they accurately characterise the mechanisms underlying social biases. The claim that outgroups suffer dehumanization is near ubiquitous in the social sciences. We challenge the most prominent psychological model of dehumanization - infrahumanization theory - which holds outgroup members are subtly dehumanized by being denied human emotions. We examine the theory across seven intergroup contexts in thirteen pre-registered and highly powered experiments (N = 1690). We find outgroup members are not denied uniquely human emotions relative to ingroup members. Rather, they are ascribed prosocial emotions to a lesser extent but antisocial emotions to a greater extent. Apparent evidence for infrahumanization is better explained by ingroup preference, outgroup derogation and stereotyping. Infrahumanization theory may obscure more than it reveals about intergroup bias.

•

Infrahumanization theory predicts outgroups are often denied uniquely human emotions.

•

However, to date, antisocial uniquely human emotions have not been investigated.

•

We test attributions of prosocial and antisocial emotions to social groups.

•

Attributions of antisocial human emotions were stronger for outgroups than ingroups.

•

We find no support for the predictions of infrahumanization theory.

Metadehumanization and Self-dehumanization are Linked to Reduced Drinking Refusal Self-Efficacy and Increased Anxiety and Depression Symptoms in Patients with Severe Alcohol Use Disorder

Metadehumanization, the perception of being treated as less than a human by others, is a pervasive phenomenon in intergroup relations. It is dissociated from stigmatization or stereotypes, and it has been recently identified as a critical process in severe alcohol use disorders (SAUD). Metadehumanization is associated with a wide array of negative consequences for the victim, including negative emotions, aversive self-awareness, cognitive deconstruction, and psychosomatic strains, which are related to anxiety and depression. This study aims to investigate if metadehumanization occurring among patients with SAUD is associated with clinical factors involved in the maintenance of the disease, namely symptoms of depression or anxiety and drinking refusal self-efficacy. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 120 patients with SAUD. Self-reported questionnaires measured metadehumanization, self-dehumanization (i.e., the feeling of being less than a human), anxiety, depression, drinking refusal self-efficacy, and demographics. Metadehumanization was significantly associated with self-dehumanization, anxiety, depression, and drinking refusal self-efficacy. Additionally, path analyses showed that self-dehumanization mediated the links between metadehumanization and clinical variables. These results indicate that metadehumanization and self-dehumanization could be essential factors to consider during SAUD treatment, as they are associated with increased psychiatric symptoms and reduced drinking refusal self-efficacy.

Alterations in Religious Rituals Due to COVID-19 Could Be Related to Intragroup Negativity: A Case of Changes in Receiving Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Community in Poland

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected various domains of everyday life, including important religious rituals. In the Roman Catholic Church in Poland, the reception of Holy Communion was substantially altered. The suggestion of the Polish Episcopal Conference and diocesan bishops was to receive Holy Communion on the hand during the pandemic, while receiving on the tongue had been the default form before the pandemic. The present studies investigated whether alterations in the form of receiving Holy Communion during the pandemic resulted in intragroup negativity. A total of 376 Polish Roman Catholics participated in two online studies. The most ambivalent emotions toward their religious community were experienced by the followers who recognized reception of Holy Communion on the hand only. Intergroup bias occurred within the “hand only” and the “mouth only” groups and consisted in out-group favoritism (within the “hand only”) and out-group derogation (“mouth only”) in their perception of religious orientation. Intergroup empathy bias occurred in the “hand only” and “spiritual reception” groups, which reported less empathy toward those of the out-group (“mouth only”) infected with SARS-CoV-2. The highest legitimacy of the Church authority was agreed upon by the supporters of both forms of receiving Holy Communion.

No convincing evidence outgroups are denied uniquely human characteristics: Distinguishing intergroup preference from trait-based dehumanization

According to the dual model, outgroup members can be dehumanized by being thought to possess uniquely and characteristically human traits to a lesser extent than ingroup members. However, previous research on this topic has tended to investigate the attribution of human traits that are socially desirable in nature such as warmth, civility and rationality. As a result, it has not yet been possible to determine whether this form of dehumanization is distinct from intergroup preference and stereotyping. We first establish that participants associate undesirable (e.g., corrupt, jealous) as well as desirable (e.g., open-minded, generous) traits with humans. We then go on to show that participants tend to attribute desirable human traits more strongly to ingroup members but undesirable human traits more strongly to outgroup members. This pattern holds across three different intergroup contexts for which dehumanization effects have previously been reported: political opponents, immigrants and criminals. Taken together, these studies cast doubt on the claim that a trait-based account of representing others as ‘less human’ holds value in the study of intergroup bias.

•

The dual model predicts outgroups are attributed human traits to a lesser extent.

•

To date, predominantly desirable traits have been investigated, creating a confound.

•

We test attributions of desirable and undesirable human traits to social groups.

•

Attributions of undesirable human traits were stronger for outgroups than ingroups.

•

We find no support for the predictions of the dual model of dehumanization.

Self- and Other-Dehumanization Processes in Health-Related Contexts: A Critical Review of the Literature

Dehumanization is an everyday, pervasive phenomenon in health contexts. Given its detrimental consequences to health care, much research has been dedicated to understanding and promoting the humanization of health services. However, health care service research has neglected the sociopsychological processes involved in the dehumanization of self and others, in formal but also informal health-related contexts. Drawing upon sociopsychological models of dehumanization, this article will bridge this gap by presenting a critical review of studies on everyday meaning-making and person perception processes of dehumanization in health-related contexts. A database search was conducted in PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, using a combination of keywords on dehumanization and health/illness/body; 3,229 references were screened; 95 full texts were assessed for eligibility; 59 studies were included. Most studies focused on informal contexts, reflecting a decontextualized and one-sided view of dehumanization (i.e., not integrating actors’ and victims’ perspectives). Despite the dominant focus on self-dehumanization, emerging perspectives uncover the role of processes that deny human uniqueness to others, and their individual determinants and consequences for mental health. A few studies bring to light the functions of a variety of dehumanizing body metaphors on self- and other-dehumanization. These trends in the literature leave several gaps, which are here critically analyzed to inform future research.

The Perception of Instability and Legitimacy of Status Differences Enhances the Infrahumanization Bias among High Status Groups

Previous research within the social identity framework has shown that perceptions of legitimacy and stability of status differences interactively determine cognitive, emotional, and behavioural responses to intergroup contexts. Whether such perceptions affect subtle forms of prejudice, namely infrahumanisation, is unknown. We examined if the perceptions regarding high status stability and legitimacy are associated to the infrahumanisation bias. We hypothesized that participants perceiving status differences as unstable and legitimate would report higher levels of infrahumanization than those who perceive status differences as stable and/or illegitimate. Participants (N = 439 Italian students enrolled in psychology courses) completed a structured paper-and-pencil questionnaire. We found that participants tended to attribute more negative secondary emotions to their ingroup (Italians) than to the outgroup (immigrants from Africa), indicating the presence of an infrahumanization bias. The results of a moderated regression aimed at predicting infrahumanization showed that high-status group members who perceived status differences as legitimate and unstable reported higher levels of infrahumanization than their counterparts did. The results attest the important and independent role of the perceptions related to the status for the debate on intergroup relations.

Encouraging children to mentalise about a perceived outgroup increases prosocial behaviour towards outgroup members

We investigated whether encouraging young children to discuss the mental states of an immigrant group would elicit more prosocial behaviour towards them and impact on their perception of a group member's emotional experience. Five- and 6-year-old children were either prompted to talk about the thoughts and feelings of this social group or to talk about their actions. Across two studies, we found that this manipulation increased the extent to which children shared with a novel member of the immigrant group who was the victim of a minor transgression. The manipulation did not lead to greater sharing towards a victim from the children's own culture and did not influence their perception of a victim's negative emotions. These results may ultimately have implications for interventions aimed at fostering positive intergroup relations within the context of immigration.

More About When I's Meet: The Intergroup Ramifications of I-Sharing, Part II

Previous research on I-sharing (the belief that one has shared the same, in-the-moment subjective experience with another person) revealed its promise for improving intergroup relations. We expand on this research by (a) pursuing the mechanism underlying I-sharing's effects; (b) asking whether I-sharing promotes positive, behavioral intergroup outcomes; and (c) asking whether the effects of I-sharing generalize to the outgroup at large. Study 1 rules out the possibility that I-sharing promotes liking for an outgroup member via a process of subtyping. Study 2 shows that I-sharing promotes liking for an outgroup member because it promotes a general feeling of subjective connection to the I-sharer. Study 3 provides evidence that I-sharing promotes helping across intergroup lines, and Study 4 shows that I-sharing with one outgroup member reduces infrahumanization of the outgroup more generally. These four studies contribute to our growing understanding of the unique impact that I-sharing has on intergroup outcomes.

The Developmental Origins of Dehumanization

Dehumanization is a complex social phenomenon, intimately connected to intergroup harm and neglect. However, developmental research has only recently started to investigate this important topic. In this chapter, we review research in areas closely related to dehumanization including children's intergroup preferences, essentialist conceptions of social groups, and understanding of relative status. We then highlight the small number of recent studies that have investigated the development of this social bias more directly. We close by making a series of suggestions for future research that will enable us to better understand the nature and causes of this harmful phenomenon.

Existential isolation and I-sharing: Interpersonal and intergroup implications

I-sharing, or believing one has the same in-the-moment experience as another person, constitutes a specific way in which people may share reality. I-sharing research underscores its significance for interpersonal and intergroup outcomes. I-sharing fosters liking for people who differ from us in objective and sometimes important ways, and counteracts robust tendencies to favor ingroup members and dehumanize outgroup members. Research and theory indicate that existential isolation-feeling alone in one's experience-explains the potency of I-sharing, insofar as people with high levels of existential isolation are especially drawn to those with whom they have reason to believe they I-share. Recent findings are reviewed, followed by a discussion of the clinical implications of the work.

Human like me: Evidence that I-sharing humanizes the otherwise dehumanized

People persistently undermine the humanness of outgroup members, leaving researchers perplexed as to how to address this problem of 'dehumanization' (Haslam & Loughnan, , Ann Rev of Psychol, 65, 399; Leyens, , Group Process Intergroup Relat, 12, 807). Here, we test whether I-sharing (i.e., sharing a subjective experience) counters this tendency by promoting the humanization of outgroup members. In Study 1, White participants had a face-to-face meeting with a White or Black confederate and either did or did not I-share with this confederate. The extent to which participants humanized the outgroup member depended on whether or not they I-shared with her. Study 2 tested the effect of I-sharing on the two distinct dimensions of dehumanization (Haslam, , Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 10, 252). Conceptually replicating the results of Study 1, participants who I-shared with a social class ingroup or outgroup member rated their partner as higher in human nature than those who did not I-share with their partner. These results add to the growing literature on I-sharing's implications for intergroup processes and suggest effective ways of tackling a persistent problem.

Occupational status differences in attributions of uniquely human emotions

Infrahumanization theory has claimed that groups tend to infrahumanize, and thus denigrate, each other irrespective of group status. However, research on infrahumanization has mainly addressed status in the context of national, ethnic, and regional divisions. The present studies tested the effect of group status in infrahumanization by employing occupational groups of varied status, both in abstract (blue-collar vs. white-collar workers) and specific terms (lawyers vs. shopkeepers, and high school teachers vs. university faculty members and primary school teachers). The results showed that only relatively higher status groups always attributed uniquely human emotions more to their in-group than to lower status out-groups. In contrast, lower status groups showed no bias in attributions of uniquely human emotions, or were biased in favour of the higher status out-group. The discussion of these results points to the role of consensus in the distribution of social value amongst groups of asymmetric status.

Dehumanization: Humanity and its Denial

In this paper, which is the introduction to the special issue ‘Dehumanization: Humanity and its Denial,’ we present a brief overview of social psychological research on the concept of dehumanization and infrahumanization. Focusing on the findings and theorizing of the special issue articles we discuss the relation between these two concepts, their determinants and consequences, particularly in the context of intergroup relations, but also with regard to the distal motives that may prompt individuals to equate humanity to the groups to which they belong.